Is the Cosmic Microwave Background a Picture of the Universe's Past?

In summary, the cosmic microwave background is a picture of the radiation left from recombination, but the image we see today from COBE or WMAP is not exactly the same as it was then due to redshifting. The fluctuations we see today are more apparent because the universe was smoother at earlier times. The CMB we observe today gives a density fluctuation map as it was at last scattering, with only a difference in wavelength due to redshift. There are also other factors that affect the CMB, such as interactions with matter and dark energy, lensing, and the epoch of reionization. These are taken into account when studying the CMB with future satellites like Planck.
  • #1
electerr
28
0
Hi,
Am I right when I say that the cosmic microwave background is a picture of the radiation left from recombination but that the picture (from COBE or WMAP) that we see today is not exactly the same as it was then due to the redshifting of the radiation particles. The flucuations that we see today are also more apparent now than they have been in the past since the universe was smoother at earlier times. So the pictures we get today from COBE or WMAP are pictures of the CMB NOW not as it was 300,000yrs after the big bang. I think it is really confusing that it is sometimes said that the CMB is a representation of the universe as it was at the time of recombination. Am I on the right track or have I totally misunderstood? A big thanks for anyone who can set me straight!
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think that apart from the wavelength that differs due to redshift, the CMB that is observed today gives the density fluctuation map as it was at last scattering - about 1 part in 10^5. It's a bit like taking a photo of the same person in UV and in IR - it looks different, but the features are the same...
 
  • #3
Thanks for your reply Jorrie!

Can anyone confirm this?

I thought that the universe was smoother in the past, wouldn't these changes in the density affect the way the CMB looks?

Thanks again!
 
  • #4
electerr said:
Can anyone confirm this?
Yes.

electerr said:
I thought that the universe was smoother in the past, wouldn't these changes in the density affect the way the CMB looks?
Normal matter and dark matter cluster. Light does not. When the universe became transparent after the emission of the CMB, the light basically just traveled freely.

Now, it is worth mentioning that this is only an approximation (that of light traveling freely), but it is a very good one. After all, the rest of the universe besides the lights from the CMB do interact with it to a degree. Sometimes the light goes through a galaxy cluster, for instance, and interacts with the gas cloud there (the Sunyaev Zel'dovich effect). There's also a very thin, diffuse plasma that fills the entire universe since the epoch of reionization (when the first stars turned on, they re-ionized the interstellar gas). This slightly dims the CMB over the entire sky. There's also the effect of dark energy which causes gravitational potentials to change with time from the Integrated Sachs-Wolfe Effect (when a photon enters a gravitational well it blueshifts slightly, but by the time it starts to get out of the well the well has shallowed slightly and so it redshifts a bit less than the blueshift upon entering...this causes a slight brightening of the CMB at large distance scales). There's also the fact that massive structures around the universe lens the light from the CMB, which causes light that would have arrived at one angle to arrive from another.

All of these effects are known, of course, and are small enough to be nearly undetectable at the level of the current full-sky CMB data from WMAP. But they are significant systematics that we need to take into account to understand the next-generation CMB satellite, Planck.
 
  • #5
As chalnoth noted, the universe [radiation wise] was clumpier in the past, as we perceive it. But, perception may be an issue.
 
  • #6
Ok, so it is actually a picture of the past with the only difference being the wavelength. Great, now I know... Thanks for the help!
 

FAQ: Is the Cosmic Microwave Background a Picture of the Universe's Past?

What is CMB and how is it a picture of the past?

CMB stands for Cosmic Microwave Background and it is the oldest light in the universe, dating back to just 380,000 years after the Big Bang. It is a picture of the past because it is the remnant radiation from the early stages of the universe and provides us with information about its structure and evolution.

How was the CMB discovered?

The CMB was first discovered in 1964 by two scientists, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, while working with a radio telescope. They found that no matter where they pointed the telescope, they detected a faint background radiation that was evenly spread across the sky. This was later confirmed by the COBE satellite in 1992.

What does the CMB tell us about the early universe?

The CMB provides us with important clues about the early universe, such as its temperature, density, and composition. It also supports the Big Bang theory by showing that the universe was once much hotter and denser and has been expanding and cooling ever since.

How do scientists use the CMB to study the structure of the universe?

Scientists use the CMB to study the structure of the universe by measuring tiny fluctuations in its temperature. These fluctuations are caused by variations in the density of matter in the early universe and can help us understand the distribution of matter and the formation of large-scale structures such as galaxies and clusters of galaxies.

What are some current and future projects involving the study of CMB?

Current projects involving the study of CMB include the Planck satellite, which is providing more precise measurements of the CMB, and the South Pole Telescope, which is mapping the CMB in greater detail. Future projects include the James Webb Space Telescope, which will study the CMB in infrared wavelengths, and the CMB-S4 project, which aims to map the CMB with even higher resolution and sensitivity.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
103
Views
6K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
2K
Back
Top